1. Title, director and release year?
Blind Spot, Adolfo Doring, 2008
2. What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
Earth’s depleting oil reserves put us in a tough situation to find an equivalent alternative energy source to maintain our way of life.
3. What sustainability problems does the film draw out?
Our society is using a non-renewable energy source which is running out. Government is aiding solutions that are not efficient and causing other problems. We have created a way of life that is going to be very difficult to maintain without cheap oil. Our culture must be willing to change. Existing corporations have more power over newer more efficient companies. We give faith that small inventions will save us when they are merely making us slightly more efficient at using energy.
4. What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
The argument against ethanol was compelling. It takes more energy to create ethanol than is in ethanol. This is due to the high use of energy in modern day farming techniques. Farming no longer uses muscle power, it only uses petroleum. Modern farming is a way to turn petroleum into food. Farmers are more inclined to grow corn for ethanol than for food because of government stipends. So farming is now a way to turn petroleum into ethanol, which is not efficient at all. The price of food is also rising because so much food is being used towards ethanol. The comparison between oil and man power was a very informative way to look at oil value. It said that 1 gallon of oil can perform the same amount of work as 250 man hours. 1 gallon of oil is about $3, but 250 man hours is thousands of dollars. This puts the real value of oil in perspective and makes me realize how underpriced oil is today on the market. The statement about how car manufacturers worked together to kill the electric car when it was first introduced was interesting. This shows how inapt our society is to accept change. I liked the argument that we are all on a train and no one is driving. Our culture wants to believe that someone is taking care of the energy problem and that energy saving bulbs are going to save us. These “band aid” solutions merely make us more efficient at using energy, and as a whole we are still using more energy, and no one is taking charge to stop it. The idea about efficiency being a bad thing was very interesting. It said that when cars were made more efficient, people started using less oil, then oil prices went down and people started driving more. So now we use more oil than we did in the beginning. This shows that our society adapts to prices and has the ability to drive less, but chooses not to if it can afford to drive more.
5. What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by?
There were a few scenes of people in NYC trying to show people in rough situations. One of them was of a guy limping. I did not really understand why this was in the movie. It didn’t help the film at all and was somewhat confusing as to how it fit into the movie.
6. What additional information does this film compel you to seek out? Where do you want to dig deeper and what connections do you want to make with other issues, factors, problems, etc.?
I would like to seek out data comparing oil prices to the amount of oil being consumed by vehicles. I would also like to look back at how the electric car started and look at its progress in advancing its technology since then.
7. What audiences does the film best address? What kind of imagination is fostered in viewers? Do you think the film is likely to change the way viewers think about and act on environmental problems?
This film best addresses people who live in the suburbs and drive long distances to work. It could also be good for people who take part in leisure activities that require a lot of oil.
8. What kinds of action or points of intervention are suggested by the film?
This film suggests that we stop putting money and resources into ethanol production and research and put more into other technologies. We should start driving less and become less dependent on cars. People should start using man power as a more widely used energy source.
9. What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?
This film did not go in depth about how burning fossil fuels affects our atmosphere and environment. It also could have talked about the health issues with burning oil in farming and whether there are chemicals going into food products due to modern day farming techniques.
1. Title, director and release year?
Blind Spot, Adolfo Doring, 2008
2. What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
Earth’s depleting oil reserves put us in a tough situation to find an equivalent alternative energy source to maintain our way of life.
3. What sustainability problems does the film draw out?
Our society is using a non-renewable energy source which is running out. Government is aiding solutions that are not efficient and causing other problems. We have created a way of life that is going to be very difficult to maintain without cheap oil. Our culture must be willing to change. Existing corporations have more power over newer more efficient companies. We give faith that small inventions will save us when they are merely making us slightly more efficient at using energy.
4. What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
The argument against ethanol was compelling. It takes more energy to create ethanol than is in ethanol. This is due to the high use of energy in modern day farming techniques. Farming no longer uses muscle power, it only uses petroleum. Modern farming is a way to turn petroleum into food. Farmers are more inclined to grow corn for ethanol than for food because of government stipends. So farming is now a way to turn petroleum into ethanol, which is not efficient at all. The price of food is also rising because so much food is being used towards ethanol. The comparison between oil and man power was a very informative way to look at oil value. It said that 1 gallon of oil can perform the same amount of work as 250 man hours. 1 gallon of oil is about $3, but 250 man hours is thousands of dollars. This puts the real value of oil in perspective and makes me realize how underpriced oil is today on the market. The statement about how car manufacturers worked together to kill the electric car when it was first introduced was interesting. This shows how inapt our society is to accept change. I liked the argument that we are all on a train and no one is driving. Our culture wants to believe that someone is taking care of the energy problem and that energy saving bulbs are going to save us. These “band aid” solutions merely make us more efficient at using energy, and as a whole we are still using more energy, and no one is taking charge to stop it. The idea about efficiency being a bad thing was very interesting. It said that when cars were made more efficient, people started using less oil, then oil prices went down and people started driving more. So now we use more oil than we did in the beginning. This shows that our society adapts to prices and has the ability to drive less, but chooses not to if it can afford to drive more.
5. What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by?
There were a few scenes of people in NYC trying to show people in rough situations. One of them was of a guy limping. I did not really understand why this was in the movie. It didn’t help the film at all and was somewhat confusing as to how it fit into the movie.
6. What additional information does this film compel you to seek out? Where do you want to dig deeper and what connections do you want to make with other issues, factors, problems, etc.?
I would like to seek out data comparing oil prices to the amount of oil being consumed by vehicles. I would also like to look back at how the electric car started and look at its progress in advancing its technology since then.
7. What audiences does the film best address? What kind of imagination is fostered in viewers? Do you think the film is likely to change the way viewers think about and act on environmental problems?
This film best addresses people who live in the suburbs and drive long distances to work. It could also be good for people who take part in leisure activities that require a lot of oil.
8. What kinds of action or points of intervention are suggested by the film?
This film suggests that we stop putting money and resources into ethanol production and research and put more into other technologies. We should start driving less and become less dependent on cars. People should start using man power as a more widely used energy source.
9. What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?
This film did not go in depth about how burning fossil fuels affects our atmosphere and environment. It also could have talked about the health issues with burning oil in farming and whether there are chemicals going into food products due to modern day farming techniques.